EECS Education for the Future

by Paul Penfield, Jr.

As you read this newsletter, we're initiating
a change of leadership in the MIT EECS
department. After almost a decade as
Department Head, I'm pleased to turn things over
to the next team, headed by Professor John
Guttag.

People have asked me how our educational programs
have evolved over the past ten years. The
mission of our department is, of course, to educate
students, and there have been changes in all
three levels of degrees -- bachelor's, master's, and
doctoral.

These programs serve different needs. The
doctoral degree is for people who want careers in
research, scholarship, teaching, and related fields
on the frontiers of knowledge. The master's level
is for people aiming for a career in the practice of
engineering. And our bachelor's degree programs
prepare students for a variety of careers, including,
but not limited to, engineering.

Successful Master of Engineering Introduced

In 1993, after many years of study and preparation,
we introduced our five-year Master of
Engineering program for students who want an
engineering career. This is now our flagship program,
taken by two-thirds of our undergraduate
majors.

The M.Eng. program is seamless across five
years. Students have flexibility in planning and
don't have to spend the first four years getting a
bachelor's degree and then one year working on
the master's. M.Eng. students can postpone an
undergraduate requirement until the fifth year,
for example, in order to take a graduate course
that may be offered only in their senior year.

The program is also seamless across the many
technical domains of our department. Unlike
some other universities, MIT has a single department
of electrical engineering and computer science,
and M.Eng. students can pick their own
areas of specialization.

Reform of undergraduate curricula

Our bachelor's degrees serve students who want
an entry-level position in engineering or who
want a solid grounding in electrical engineering
and computer science as a basis for entering other
fields, such as medicine, law, journalism, or management.
This strong, technologically-based education
is ideal for preparing students for their
future life, regardless of where circumstances
take them.

We regard these programs as a modern form of
liberal education -- modern in that science and
technology are present in large doses, and liberal
in the sense that students aren't being directed to
specific sectors of society or even to specific professions.
This education opens many doors, rather
than limiting students to one particular door.

During the design of the M.Eng. program,
which is intended to guide students into engineering,
we thought about the role of the undergraduate
programs. We had (and still have) two
such programs, one in EE and one in CS.
Previously, they had different structures and different
requirements, but by focusing on what they
had in common, we were able to combine them in
what amounts to a single program with specializations
in EE or CS. Once we did that, we realized
that some students would be well served by
delaying their specialization, and we designed a
third program for those don't want to be either
electrical engineers or computer scientists, but
rather engineers who can freely rove this whole
domain.

In 1996, our undergraduate programs were
scheduled for accreditation review. We weren't
sure whether the accrediting agencies would take
kindly to the flexibility inherent in the third program
mentioned above. All three degree programs
were duly accredited, however, and the new program
was even accredited retroactively so as to
cover graduates from the previous two years.

The accrediting agencies aren't the only ones
who like the new program. Our students do also.
It's the most popular of the three undergraduate
programs, now attracting more enrollment than
the other two combined.

Doctorate program reexamined

The doctoral degree is for people who want
careers based on research, teaching, or scholarship.
Our program has always been built around a
deep research experience with an "apprenticeship"
to a faculty member. While preserving this
important aspect, we're implementing several
reforms in the admission, advising, and qualification
of students. In the process, we're facing the
question of how to structure our very large
department so as to provide welcoming, smaller
environments which will promote student
research most effectively.